Growing Risk: Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks 1 Growing Risk Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Growing Risk: Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks 1 Growing Risk Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks Growing Risk Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks Aviva Glaser and Patty Glick 2012 Growing Risk: Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks 1 Growing Risk Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks Prepared by Aviva Glaser, Legislative Representative, Agriculture Policy Patty Glick, Senior Climate Change Specialist Acknowledgements This report was made possible due to the generous support of the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. The authors wish to thank many people for their time and contributions to this report. We would like to thank the following National Wildlife Federation staff for providing valuable edits and feedback: Julie Sibbing, Bruce Stein, Doug Inkley, and Lara Bryant. Additionally, we would like to thank several experts for their time, input, and helpful review comments: Dr. Joseph DiTomaso, University of California, Davis; Dr. Doria Gordon, The Nature Conservancy; Bryan Endres, J.D., University of Illinois; Dr. Lauren Quinn, University of Illinois; Doug Johnson, California Invasive Plant Council; and Read Porter, J.D., Environmental Law Institute. Designed by Maja Smith, MajaDesign, Inc. © 2012 National Wildlife Federation Cover image: The highly-invasive giant reed (Arundo donax), a candidate species for bioenergy production, has taken over vast areas along the Rio Grande, as seen in this aerial view near Eagle Pass, Texas. Credit: John Goolsby, USDA. Suggested citation: Glaser, A. and P. Glick. 2012. Growing Risk: Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks. Washington, DC: National Wildlife Federation. i Growing Risk: Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks Table of Contents Little bluestem, a native grass. Credit: NRCS. 1. Executive Summary 1 2. Overview 3 The Promise of Bioenergy 3 Risks from Bioenergy 4 A Focus on Invasiveness 4 3. Invasive Bioenergy Feedstocks: A Major Concern 7 Invasive Plans Can Wreak Havoc on Ecosystems and Society 7 Weediness: A Characteristic of a “Good” Biomass Plant 8 Harvesting Existing Invasive Plants: Win-Win or Pandora’s Box? 9 Adding Climate Change to the Mix 10 Selective Breeding and Genetic Modification 11 The Myth of Total Sterility 12 4. Case Studies of Feedstocks of Concern 14 Giant Reed (Arundo donax) 14 Miscanthus (Miscanthus species) 16 Genetically Modified Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus grandis x Eucalyptus urophylla) 18 Reed Canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) 20 Algae 22 Napiergrass (Pennisetum purpureum) 24 5. Minimizing the Risks: The Importance of Embracing Precaution 26 Current Regulation of Invasive Species 26 Screening Tools 32 6. Conclusions and Recommendations 34 Concluding Thoughts 41 7. Endnotes 42 Growing Risk: Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks ii 1 Executive Summary ithout question, America needs to transition to a cleaner, more sustainable W energy future. As we move forward with our energy choices, we must be mindful of how short- term economic decisions can come with unintended consequences and high long-term costs to society and the environment. Bioenergy is one homegrown source of renewable energy that could help meet some of our energy needs. However, in order to create a truly clean energy future, bioenergy must be produced in a way that has long-term economic viability, helps address climate change, and protects and enhances native habitats and ecosystems. The explosion in federal and state mandates and incentives for renewable energy in recent years has led to a greatly increased demand for cheap and plentiful biomass from a variety of plants and micro- organisms. This increased demand for bioenergy has led to considerable interest in a number of non-native and potentially invasive species that are currently being cultivated or considered for use as bioenergy crops. In fact, some of the very characteristics that make a plant particularly useful as a source of biomass energy (e.g., rapid growth, competitiveness, tolerance of a range of climate conditions) are the same characteristics that Parabel grows non-genetically modified, native aquatic make a plant a potentially highly invasive species. plants in Florida to use as a renewable energy feedstock. Credit: Julie Sibbing. Widespread cultivation of exotic and genetically modified species for bioenergy is becoming increasingly likely. In order to create a truly clean energy Should these species escape cultivated areas and enter nearby habitats, the results could be devastating for future, bioenergy must be produced in a native ecosystems as well as the economy. Very little is way that has long-term economic viability, known about the full potential scope of the problem, yet the industry is moving full speed ahead. Already, there helps address climate change, and are examples of intentional cultivation of biomass species that are known to be invasive or have the potential to protects and enhances native habitats become invasive. For instance: and ecosystems. 4 • Giant reed (Arundo donax) is being used as a bioenergy As a result, invasive species that we may have been able crop in Florida, despite the fact that it has been known to inhibit are causing widespread environmental and to invade important riparian ecosystems and displace economic harm. habitat for native species in states across the southern half of the country. We now have an opportunity to prevent irreparable harm by heeding sensible precautions. With foresight and careful • Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), which is screening, we have important opportunities to minimize considered to be one of the most harmful invasive species and, where possible, prevent negative impacts of biomass in America’s wetlands, rivers, and lakes, is being proposed feedstocks on the nation’s communities and ecosystems. for cultivation as a bioenergy feedstock in several areas, We recommend some key actions to help ensure that the including the Eastern Upper Peninsula of Michigan. next generation of bioenergy does not fuel the next invasive species problem. • Cylindro (Cylindrospermopsis raciborskii), a type of algae that is associated with toxic algal blooms in the Great 1. Future bioenergy development should encourage Lakes region, is just one of many non-native or modified ecological restoration and improve wildlife habitat through strains of algae under consideration for bioenergy, even the use of ecologically beneficial biomass feedstocks such though the fast growth rate of algae and the inherent as waste materials and sustainably collected native plants difficulty in containing them is a major concern. and forest residues. • Napiergrass (Pennisetum purpureum), also called 2. Federal and state governments should conduct elephant grass, has been listed as an invasive plant coordinated efforts to restrict or prohibit the use of in Florida and described as one of the most problematic known invasive species as dedicated bioenergy weeds in the world, and yet BP is currently developing feedstocks through rigorous Weed Risk Assessment a cultivated variety of it as an energy crop in the Gulf (WRA) screening protocols. Coast Region. 3. State and federal governments should implement In addition, the use of already highly-destructive invasive rigorous monitoring, early detection, and rapid response plants for bioenergy, including Chinese tallow (Triadica protocols, paid for by feedstock producers through sebifera), kudzu (Pueraria montana var. lobata), Eurasian insurance bonding or other financial mechanisms. watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), and common reed (Phragmites australis), is being proposed as a way to 4. Feedstock producers should adopt best management capitalize on the potential benefits of the plants while plans for monitoring and mitigation to reduce the risk providing an opportunity for their control. While this of invasion. may allow for a win-win for ecosystem restoration and renewable energy production, it also raises the concern 5. The federal government should assign liability to that the active re-establishment of the invasive species, feedstock producers for damages from and remediation of rather than their control, might be incentivized. invasions by feedstock varieties that they develop. The severity of this threat is by no means trivial. Every 6. Governments and businesses should better account year, invasive species cost the United States billions of for the economic risks associated with invasiveness of dollars and affect countless acres of native ecosystems. feedstocks when assessing relevant costs and benefits of Researchers estimate that nearly half of the species listed potential bioenergy projects. as threatened or endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act are at risk, at least in part, due to the impacts Bioenergy can be an important part of a sustainable energy of invasive species. Despite this, few safeguards exist future, but only if it is produced in a way that safeguards in law and in practice to prevent the spread of invasive native ecosystems and minimizes the risk of invasion. species. To date, current laws and regulations dealing with invasive species have been reactive and piecemeal. Growing Risk: Addressing the Invasive Potential of Bioenergy Feedstocks 2 2 Overview s the world focuses greater attention on finding alternatives to fossil fuels in order to A meet our growing energy demands, reduce carbon emissions, and enhance global security, interest in expanding the use of bioenergy has grown considerably. Bioenergy – also called biomass energy – refers to the energy resources derived from plants
Recommended publications
  • Evaluation of the Combustion Characteristics of Four Perennial Energy Crops (Arundo Donax, Cynara Cardunculus, Miscanthus X Giganteus and Panicum Virgatum)
    2nd World Conference on Biomass for Energy, Industry and Climate Protection, 10-14 May 2004, Rome, Italy EVALUATION OF THE COMBUSTION CHARACTERISTICS OF FOUR PERENNIAL ENERGY CROPS (ARUNDO DONAX, CYNARA CARDUNCULUS, MISCANTHUS X GIGANTEUS AND PANICUM VIRGATUM) Jonas Dahl & Ingwald Obernberger Institute of Resource Efficient and Sustainable Systems, Graz University of Technology, Inffeldgasse 25, A - 8010 Graz, Austria, Tel.: +43 (0)316 481300, Fax: +43 (0)316 481300 4; E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT: The perennial crops giant reed, switchgrass, miscanthus and cardoon were investigated in laboratory- scale and pilot-scale combustion test runs. Laboratory-scale test runs were conducted in a fixed bed pot reactor monitoring the temperature in the fuel bed and the release of gaseous components while pilot-scale test runs where conducted in a 150 kWth rotating grate fired combustion plant measuring formed emissions of CO, NOX, SO2, HCl, and particulates as well as performing deposit probe measurements. The results revealed that the high concentration of ash and slag forming elements such as Si, K and Ca cause severe problems regarding slagging if not specially considered during combustion. Moreover, high concentrations of N are another challenge regarding measures in order to avoid high emissions of NOx. Moreover, also HCl and SO2 emissions are considerably higher compared to wood fuels due to the higher concentrations of Cl and S in these fuels. Keywords: biomass characteristics, biomass conversion, cynara cardonculus, giant reed, switchgrass, miscanthus 1 INTRODUCTION combustion unit (nominal boiler capacity 150 kWth) were carried out with larger amounts (2-4 tons) of Due to the limited availability of wood fuels, in pelletised switch grass and chopped giant reed and southern Europe, high yield energy crops could give an chopped miscanthus (MI).
    [Show full text]
  • Is Biodiesel As Attractive an Economic Alternative As Ethanol?
    PURDUE EXTENSION Bio ID-341 Fueling America ThroughE Renewablenergy Resources Is Biodiesel as Attractive an Economic Alternative as Ethanol? Allan Gray Department of Agricultural Economics Purdue University What Is Biodiesel? and as a lubricant additive to low sulfur diesel Biodiesel is a renewable fuel alternative to fuel. A change in environmental laws associ- standard on-road diesel. Biodiesel is made ated with sulfur emissions from diesel has from plant oils, such as soybean oil; animal caused the industry to move from a standard fat from slaughter facilities; or used greases. number 2 diesel to a cleaner burning number Seventy-three percent of biodiesel produced 1 diesel with much lower sulfur emission. in the United States comes from soybean oil. The remaining 27% is produced from the However, number 1 diesel fuel has a much other feedstocks. lower lubricity than number 2 diesel, causing additional wear on diesel engines. By blending The ability to use a variety of feedstocks to number 1 diesel with at least 2% biodiesel, the make biodiesel differentiates this biofuel mar- lubricity properties of the fuel can be the same ket from the current ethanol market, which as number 2 diesel fuel. And, because biodie- is dominated by corn in the U.S. and sugar sel contains only small traces of sulfur when in South America. The ability to use various burned, the sulfur emission standards can still feedstocks is one of the reasons that biodiesel be met. production facilities are not as concentrated in the Midwest as ethanol plants. In 2005, approximately 75 million gallons of biodiesel were produced in 65 plants scattered How Is Biodiesel Used? across the United States (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Biofuel Policies in Select Eu Member States: 2018 Update
    © INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON CLEAN TRANSPORTATION POLICY UPDATE NOVEMBER 2018 ADVANCED BIOFUEL POLICIES IN SELECT EU MEMBER STATES: 2018 UPDATE This policy update provides details on the latest measures that select European ICCT POLICY UPDATES Union (EU) member states, namely Denmark, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, SUMMARIZE Sweden, and the United Kingdom, are taking to support advanced alternative fuels. REGULATORY AND OTHER EU POLICY BACKGROUND DEVELOPMENTS In 2018, the European Union (EU) set its climate and energy objectives for 2030. RELATED TO CLEAN They included a greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction of at least 40% and a minimum of a TRANSPORTATION 32% share of renewable energy consumption across all sectors.1 GHG emissions in the WORLDWIDE. European transportation sector have declined by only 3.8% since 2008, compared to an 18% decrease, or more, in all other sectors, indicating that the decarbonization of transportation should be a priority for the future.2 Biofuels are one of the options considered to increase renewable energy and decrease the carbon intensity of the transportation sector. Through the use of directives and national legislation, the EU has incentivized both the adoption of conventional food-based biofuels and advanced biofuels, which are made from non-food feedstocks. Such incentives date to 2009, when the EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED) mandated that by 2020, 10% of energy used in the transportation sector should come from renewable energy sources (RES).3 In 2015, the RED was 1 Jacopo Giuntoli, Final recast Renewable Energy Directive for 2021-2030 in the European Union, (ICCT: Washington, DC, 2018), https://www.theicct.org/publications/final-recast-renewable-energy-directive- 2021-2030-european-union 2 EUROSTAT (Greenhouse gas emissions by source sector (env_air_gge), accessed November 2018), https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat.
    [Show full text]
  • Spring Camelina Production Guide 2009 DEC.Indd
    SPRING CAMELINA PRODUCTION GUIDE For the Central High Plains December 2009 Central High Plains Produced by Blue Sun Energy with the support of Advancing Colorado’s Renewable Energy (ACRE) Ryan M. Lafferty, Charlie Rife and Gus Foster 1 2 INTRODUCTION Camelina, [Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz, Brassicaceae] This document is available for purchase at the AAFCO is an old world crop newly introduced to the semiarid west of website. Research is ongoing and increased feeding levels the United States. Camelina is promising new spring-sown are expected to be established in the future. rotation crop due to its excellent seedling frost tolerance, a short production cycle (60-90 days) and resistance to flea Camelina is adapted to marginal growing conditions. beetles. Camelina has a high oil content (~35% oil) and Preliminary water use efficiency research conducted in improved drought tolerance and water use efficiency (yield Akron, CO at the Great Plains Research Center indicates that vs. evapotranspiration (ET)) when compared to other oilseed it has the highest water use efficiency of the tested oilseed crops. crops (canola, juncea, and sunflowers). Camelina is planted early spring (March) and is harvested in early to mid July. Camelina is a member of the Brassicaceae (Cruciferae) Camelina is adapted (low-water use and short production family. Brassicaceae is comprised of about 350 genera and cycle) to fit into the winter wheat based crop rotation systems 3000 species. Important crops in this family include canola/ of the semiarid (10-15 inches precipitation) High Plains. rapeseed, (Brassica napus and B. rapa); mustards, (B. juncea; Sinapus alba; B.
    [Show full text]
  • A Chromosome-Scale Assembly of Miscanthus Sinensis
    1/23/2018 A chromosome-scale assembly allows genome-scale analysis A Chromosome-Scale Assembly • Genome assembly and annotation update of Miscanthus sinensis • Andropogoneae relatedness Therese Mitros University of California Berkeley • Miscanthus-specific duplication and ancestry • Miscanthus ancestry and introgression Miscanthus genome assembly is chromosome scale • A doubled-haploid accession of Miscanthus sinensis was created by Katarzyna Glowacka • Illumina sequencing to 110X depth • Illumina mate-pairs of 2kb, 5kb, fosmid-end • Chicago and HiC libraries from Dovetail Genomics • 2.079 GB assembled (11% gap) with 91% of genome assembly bases in the known 19 Miscanthus chromosomes HiC contact map Dovetail assembly agrees with genetic map RADseq markers from 3 M. ) sinensis maps and one M. sinensis cM ( x M. sacchariflorus map (H. Dong) Of 6377 64-mer markers from these maps genetic map 4298 map well to the M. sinensis DH1 assembly and validate the Dovetail assembly combined Miscanthus Miscanthus sequence assembly 1 1/23/2018 Annotation summary • 67,789 Genes, 11,489 with alternate transcripts • 53,312 show expression over 50% of their lengths • RNA-seq libraries from stem, root, and leaves sampled over multiple growing seasons • Small RNA over same time points • Available at phytozome • https://phytozome.jgi.doe.gov/pz/portal.html#!info?alias=Org_Msinensis_er Miscanthus duplication and retention relative Small RNA to Sorghum miRNA putative_miRNA 0.84% 0.14% 369 clusters miRBase annotated miRNA 61 clusters phasiRNA 43 clusters 1.21%
    [Show full text]
  • Feedstock List (As of 3/2018)
    Feedstock List (as of 3/2018) FOG: Fats / Oils / Greases Wastes / Oil Seeds Algae / Aquatic Species Industrial Aloe (Aloe vera) Meadowfoam (Limnanthes alba) Brown grease Cyanobacteria Babassu (Attalea speciosa) Mustard (Sinapis alba) Crude glycerine Halophytes (e.g., Salicornia bigelovii) *Camelina (Camelina sativa)* Nuts Fish oil Lemna (Lemna spp.) *Canola, winter (Brassica napus[occasionally rapa Olive (Olea europaea) Industrial effluent (palm) Macroalgae or campestris])* *Carinata (Brassica carinata)* Palm (Elaeis guineensis) Shrimp oil (Caridea) Mallow (Malva spp.) Castor (Ricinus communis) Peanut, Cull (Arachis hypogaea) Tall oil pitch Microalgae Citrus (Citron spp.) Pennycress (Thlaspi arvense) Tallow / Lard Spirodela (Spirodela polyrhiza) Coconut (Cocos nucifera) Pongamia (Millettia pinnata) White grease Wolffia (Wolffia arrhiza) Corn, inedible (Zea mays) Poppy (Papaver rhoeas) Waste vegetable oil Cottonseed (Gossypium) *Rapeseed (Brassica napus)* Yellow grease Croton megalocarpus Oryza sativa Croton ( ) Rice Bran ( ) Cuphea (Cuphea viscossisima) Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius) Flax / Linseed (Linum usitatissimum) Sesame (Sesamum indicum) Gourds / Melons (Cucumis melo) Soybean (Glycine max) Grapeseed (Vitis vinifera) Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) Hemp seeds (Cannabis sativa) Tallow tree (Triadica sebifera) Jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis) Tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) Jatropha (Jatropha curcas) Calophyllum inophyllum Kamani ( ) Lesquerella (Lesquerella fenderi) Cellulose Woody Grasses Residues Other Types: Arundo (Arundo donax) Bagasse
    [Show full text]
  • Camelina Sativa, a Montana Omega-3 and Fuel Crop* Alice L
    Reprinted from: Issues in new crops and new uses. 2007. J. Janick and A. Whipkey (eds.). ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA. Camelina sativa, A Montana Omega-3 and Fuel Crop* Alice L. Pilgeram, David C. Sands, Darrin Boss, Nick Dale, David Wichman, Peggy Lamb, Chaofu Lu, Rick Barrows, Mathew Kirkpatrick, Brian Thompson, and Duane L. Johnson Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz, (Brassicaceae), commonly known as false flax, leindotter and gold of pleasure, is a fall or spring planted annual oilcrop species (Putman et al. 1993). This versatile crop has been cultivated in Europe since the Bronze Age. Camelina seed was found in the stomach of Tollund man, a 4th century BCE mummy recovered from a peat bog in Denmark (Glob 1969). Anthropologists postulate that the man’s last meal had been a soup made from vegetables and seeds including barley, linseed, camelina, knotweed, bristle grass, and chamomile. The Romans used camelina oil as massage oil, lamp fuel, and cooking oil, as well as the meal for food or feed. Camelina, like many Brassicaceae, germinates and emerges in the early spring, well before most cereal grains. Early emergence has several advantages for dryland production including efficient utiliza- tion of spring moisture and competitiveness with common weeds. In response to the resurgent interest in oil crops for sustainable biofuel production, the Montana State Uni- versity (MSU) Agricultural Research Centers have conducted a multi-year, multi-specie oilseed trial. This trial included nine different oilseed crops (sunflower, safflower, soybean, rapeseed, mustard, flax, crambe, canola, and camelina). Camelina sativa emerged from this trial as a promising oilseed crop for production across Montana and the Northern Great Plains.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Production of Second Generation Biofuels: Trends and Influences
    GLOBAL PRODUCTION OF SECOND GENERATION BIOFUELS: TRENDS AND INFLUENCES January 2017 Que Nguyen and Jim Bowyer, Ph. D Jeff Howe, Ph. D Steve Bratkovich, Ph. D Harry Groot Ed Pepke, Ph. D. Kathryn Fernholz DOVETAIL PARTNERS, INC. Global Production of Second Generation Biofuels: Trends and Influences Executive Summary For more than a century, fossil fuels have been the primary source of a wide array of products including fuels, lubricants, chemicals, waxes, pharmaceuticals and asphalt. In recent decades, questions about the impacts of fossil fuel reliance have led to research into alternative feedstocks for the sustainable production of those products, and liquid fuels in particular. A key objective has been to use feedstocks from renewable sources to produce biofuels that can be blended with petroleum-based fuels, combusted in existing internal combustion or flexible fuel engines, and distributed through existing infrastructure. Given that electricity can power short-distance vehicle travel, particular attention has been directed toward bio-derived jet fuel and fuels used in long distance transport. This report summarizes the growth of second-generation biofuel facilities since Dovetail’s 2009 report1 and some of the policies that drive that growth. It also briefly discusses biofuel mandates and second-generation biorefinery development in various world regions. Second generation biorefineries are operating in all regions of the world (Figure 1), bringing far more favorable energy balances to biofuels production than have been previously realized. Substantial displacement of a significant portion of fossil-based liquid fuels has been demonstrated to be a realistic possibility. However, in the face of low petroleum prices, continuing policy support and investment in research and development will be needed to allow biofuels to reach their full potential.
    [Show full text]
  • Herbicides for Management of Waterhyacinth in the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta, California
    J. Aquat. Plant Manage. 58: 98–104 Herbicides for management of waterhyacinth in the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta, California JOHN D. MADSEN AND GUY B. KYSER* ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION Waterhyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.)Solms)isa Waterhyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms) is a free- global aquatic weed. Although a number of herbicides floating, rosette-forming aquatic plant originally from such as 2,4-D and glyphosate effectively control this plant, South America (Pfingsten et al. 2017). It has been rated as additional herbicides need to be evaluated to address the world’s worst aquatic weed (Holm et al. 1977) and one of concerns for herbicide stewardship and environmental the world’s worst 100 invasive alien species (Lowe et al. restrictions on the use of herbicides in particular areas. 2000). The Invasive Species Specialist Group reports that, as Waterhyacinth has become a significant nuisance in the of the year 2000, it was reported in 50 countries on 5 Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta. The predominant continents (Lowe et al. 2000). Introduced to the United herbicides for management of waterhyacinth in the Delta States at the Cotton Centennial Exposition in New Orleans have been 2,4-D and glyphosate. However, environmental in 1884, it spread rapidly throughout the southeastern restrictions related to irrigation water residues and United States soon thereafter and was documented to cause restrictions for preservation of endangered species are widespread navigation issues within 15 yr (Klorer 1909, prompting consideration of the new reduced-risk herbi- Penfound and Earle 1948, Williams 1980). The U.S. cides imazamox and penoxsulam. Two trials were per- Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation formed in floating quadrats in the Delta during the Service (USDA-NRCS) (2017) currently reports it for 23 summer of 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Miscanthus Establishment
    Giant Miscanthus Establishment Introduction Giant Miscanthus (Miscanthus x giganteus), a warm-season perennial grass originating in Southeast Asia from two ornamental grasses, M. sacchariflorus and M. sinensis, is a popular candidate crop for biomass production in the Midwestern United States. This sterile hybrid is high yielding with many benefits to the land including soil stabilization and carbon sequestration. Vegetative propagation methods are necessary since giant Miscanthus does not produce viable seed. Field Preparation A giant Miscanthus stand first begins with field seedbed preparation. To provide good soil to rhizome contact, Figure 1. Rhizome segments. Photo credit: Heaton Lab. the seedbed should be tilled to a 3- to 5-inch depth. Soil moisture is critical to proper establishment for early stage time after the first frost in the fall and before the last one in germination. If working with dry land, prepare your field just the spring. If not immediately replanted in a new field, they prior to planting for optimal soil moisture. Good soil contact should be kept moist and cool (37-40º F) in storage. Ideal is also critical, so conversely, don’t till when the land is wet rhizomes have two to three visible buds, are light colored, and clods will form. Nutrient (NPK) and lime applications and firm (Fig. 1). Smaller rhizomes or those that are soft to should be made to the field as necessary before planting, the touch will likely have lower emergence. following typical corn recommendations for the area. Giant Miscanthus does not have high nutrient requirements once RHIZOME PLANTING established, but fields last for 20-30 years, so it is important Specialized rhizome planters are becoming available that adequate nutrition be present at establishment.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Salinity and Waterlogging on Growth and Survival of Salicornia Europaea L., and Inland Halophyte
    Effect of Salinity and Waterlogging on Growth and Survival of Salicornia europaea L., an Inland Halophyte1 CAROLYN HOWES KEIFFER, BRIAN C. MCCARTFIY, AND IRWIN A. UNGAR, Department of Environmental and Plant Biology, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701 ABSTRACT. Salicornia europaea seedlings were exposed to various salinity and water depths for 11 weeks under controlled, growth chamber conditions. Weekly measurements were made of height, number of nodes, and number of branches per plant. Growth and survival of plants grown with the addition of NaCl were significantly greater (P <0.0001) than for plants which were not given a salt treatment. Although there were no significant (P >0.05) growth differences among plants under different water level conditions within the salt treatment group, plants which were grown without NaCl demonstrated significant decreases in growth in higher water levels, with the greatest growth occurring in the low water treatment group. All plants given a salt treatment survived until the end of the experiment. However, high mortality occurred among the plants that were not salt-treated, with all plants grown under waterlogged conditions dying by week six. The high mortality exhibited by this treatment group indicates that Salicornia, which is typically found in low marsh or inland salt marsh situations, was unable to overcome the combined stress of being continuously waterlogged in a freshwater environment. OHIO J. SCI. 94 (3): 70-73, 1994 INTRODUCTION matter and methane formation is the terminal process in The distribution of plant species in saline environments fresh water marshes (Van Diggelen 1991). Therefore, of inland North America is closely associated with soil plants living in saline waterlogged soils face four major water potentials and other factors influencing the level of problems: 1) inhibition of aerobic root respiration which salinity stress, including microtopography, precipitation, may interfere with the uptake and transport of nutrients and depth of the water table (Ungar et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioenergy and Invasive Plants: Quantifying and Mitigating Future Risks
    Invasive Plant Science and Management 2014 7:199–209 Bioenergy and Invasive Plants: Quantifying and Mitigating Future Risks Jacob N. Barney* The United States is charging toward the largest expansion of agriculture in 10,000 years with vast acreages of primarily exotic perennial grasses planted for bioenergy that possess many traits that may confer invasiveness. Cautious integration of these crops into the bioeconomy must be accompanied by development of best management practices and regulation to mitigate the risk of invasion posed by this emerging industry. Here I review the current status of United States policy drivers for bioenergy, the status of federal and state regulation related to invasion mitigation, and survey the scant quantitative literature attempting to quantify the invasive potential of bioenergy crops. A wealth of weed risk assessments are available on exotic bioenergy crops, and generally show a high risk of invasion, but should only be a first-step in quantifying the risk of invasion. The most information exists for sterile giant miscanthus, with preliminary empirical studies and demographic models suggesting a relatively low risk of invasion. However, most important bioenergy crops are poorly studied in the context of invasion risk, which is not simply confined to the production field; but also occurs in crop selection, harvest and transport, and feedstock storage. Thus, I propose a nested-feedback risk assessment (NFRA) that considers the entire bioenergy supply chain and includes the broad components of weed risk assessment, species distribution models, and quantitative empirical studies. New information from the NFRA is continuously fed back into other components to further refine the risk assessment; for example, empirical dispersal kernels are utilized in landscape-level species distribution models, which inform habitat invasibility studies.
    [Show full text]